(09-21-2015, 05:45 PM)Flickering Ember Wrote:(09-21-2015, 05:32 PM)Ignacius Wrote:(09-21-2015, 05:25 PM)Flickering Ember Wrote:(09-21-2015, 04:59 PM)Graeham Wrote: In fact, I think it highlights an interesting point: that many role-players seem assume the worst about their brethren. It's counterproductive.
This.
This is pretty much the source of RPer disagreements and drama. As soon as a RPer has evidence that another RPer has done something "bad" they don't even question it. I have seen this over and over and over again throughout my years of RPing. People will talk about it in a private channel they have with their friends or guild chat. They are free to gossip about any number of things that might actually be untrue if they had only dared to talk to the person for clarification. And it's so universal too! Who HASN'T gossiped to their friends or guild at some point?
It's the difference between:
Ember slams her hammer down on RPer A.
(In a private channel) RPer A: omg! I am fighting at the Grindstone and Ember is godmodding!
Or
Ember slams her hammer down on RPer A.
(In a whisper) RPer A: "Hey! I don't understand the way you worded your post. Can you please clarify?"
Although to be fair to Ember in subject A, she's not godmodding, she's autoing.
I do agree that you talk to the person before you talk to your guildies about that person. Â RPers improve with education, and Ember may be new and not even understand that an "auto" isn't referring to her auto-attack function.
Though I don't think it's a matter of understanding on the part of RPer A at that point. Â The person would have to say, "Hey Ember, that's an auto attack. Â You can't simply write my character being hit. Â However, you can try to hit her."
But then, that's something that ought to have been handled already by the time a roleplayer starts getting into combat. Â Hopefully, Ember would have met some mentor that didn't titter behind her back and blacklist her who could explain how this works.
At least I like to think there are still a lot of mentors out there.
Honest question: What is the difference between godmodding and "auto-ing"?
They're sort of opposites of each other. Â An auto is any action which "automatically" succeeds. Â Like when you have a hammer which you swing and hit someone without giving them a chance to dodge. Â The hammer and swinging is perfectly fine, it just assumes the other character eats it.
Godmodding is using a trait or action which, by its nature, cannot be defeated. Â The classic example is the man who can eat that hammer without a scratch. Â However, it's more common that people have electrified weapons that can't be blocked, killing the entire room with poison that nobody could have known he left there, etc. Â It's essentially something which is immune to any action.
In a way, they're opposites because autoing implies that something succeeds no matter what, and godmodding implies that no matter what, nothing succeeds. Â They're both technically etiquette violations and it's fine to allow someone to do it if that's part of your story, but in open RP, they're both pretty much forbidden.
